About Me

If I can just give to the world more than I take from it, I will be a very happy man. For there is no greater joy in life than to give.
Motto : Live, Laugh and Love.
You can follow me on Twitter too . My handle is @Raja_Sw.

Thursday, December 20, 2012

India, a country that is rarely united on anything
that doesn’t involve cricket or film (or more recently, corruption), finally
found itself rallying around an issue that, in terms of its seriousness, should’ve
been top of the country’s agenda a long, long time ago.

But then this is India – and unless “push” comes to “shove”
(and this, believe me, is a huge energy-sapping effort!) – things move at their
own sweet pace. And that is, if they do at all.

People will argue that, on the economic front, there
has been tremendous progress over the last couple of decades. Sure. But then
weren’t we perilously close to the precipice in 1991, with our foreign exchange
resources barely able to finance three weeks’ requirement? When we instituted
reforms in 1991, I don’t think we really had much of a choice. "Push" had clearly
come to "shove".

This week, “push” may have finally come to “shove” in
another matter – the matter of rape. (And, to be honest, if it still hasn't, I really don't know if it ever will).

In a country where rape is an everyday incident -
across the length and breadth of the country – it must be considered
particularly unpardonable, and the biggest example of failed governance, that the
government of the day (and I don’t care who it is) has done precious little to
stem the incidence of this heinous crime in the several decades since
independence. Or perhaps, it is partly BECAUSE of this, that rape has indeed
become an everyday incident across the length and breadth of the country.

It has taken an incident, right under the government’s
nose (so to speak) – a horrific, gruesome incident in its own backyard – to
seemingly finally wake the government up from its stupor. And create an uproar
in the media and, consequently, around the country. A 23-year old girl,
travelling with her male friend in a Delhi bus on Sunday evening, was brutally
gangraped in the bus, then further assaulted so brutally that her intestines
were completely damaged. She was then thrown out of the bus, as was her male
friend, who was himself assaulted with an iron rod. It is an incident for which
any word indicating horror sounds woefully inadequate. As at the time of
writing, the girl is still fighting for her life in Delhi’s Safdarjung
Hospital. Her male friend seems to have been less critically injured.

I must say that it is with deliberation, and quite
deliberately, that I used the word “consequently” in the previous paragraph.
For, however much we may want to deny it, the media plays a HUGE role in what
we get to know. And even how we react to it. If something is mentioned in
passing, it is far less likely to have us invested in it than something constantly
drilled into us every few minutes.

So make no mistake. This incident, gruesome and horrific though it
is, would probably not have elicited half as much of an outrage had it happened
in rural India. Or in one of India’s less glamorous states like Odisha. The
media would have reported it as a news item for the day. And moved on.

But in the pecking order of media importance, Delhi
and Mumbai occupy pride of place. So when this most repulsive of horrors was
picked up by the media, it was picked up with all the attention it deserves.
Every channel, quite rightly, had it as main news. And, expectedly, social media,
increasingly a barometer of the news weather in the country, outraged in a manner
that reflected the pain, shock and anger of all who came to know of the
incident.

And this media and public reaction was exactly what
was needed. MPs in Parliament have expressed their outrage about the incident,
some in dramatic fashion. People have begun congregating in various towns and
cities to highlight the issue of rape, to protest against government inaction
on the subject, to voice their views on how the issue should be tackled.

People have been writing articles about rape and how
they think it should be tackled – in print media, on their blogs. They have
been hyperactive in social media –
whether on Twitter with their tweets, or sharing opinions on Facebook. In
general, the issue has everybody’s attention – and very rightfully so.

Rape is one of the most heinous of crimes and, like I’ve
said earlier, should have been very high on our priority list for tackling
social ills. In fact I would expand the scope of this, and say that addressing Violence
Against Women (VAW), in its various flavors, should have been right up there in
our priority list. (For the purpose of this piece, I am excluding rape against
men, though I don’t deny its existence).

So now it’s taken such a sad and shocking incident to
make us react like this. And to seemingly shake our MPs out of their stupor.

I say “seemingly” because while the MPs have expressed
their outrage, this isn’t the first time they’ve done so. And yet, on the
ground, precious little has happened. Not that VAW is going to disappear with
some legislation, but there are several areas where the legislation is either
weak, or just missing. And it is MPs who can introduce and pass legislation for
the country. So, while the outrage is
all very well, the MPs will need to now most certainly walk the talk as well.
Otherwise this will be seen as just another hollow act on their part. Politicians have been known to take expedient action only when their own politican careers are at stake.

Many of the reactions to this incident focus on the “deterrent”
side of rape. Discussions range from a life sentence, to the death penalty, to
other forms of punishment for the perpetrator. There have been some knee-jerk
reactions no doubt, but there have also been some well-thought out opinions
expressed.

Some of the items are no-brainers.

For starters, though things have improved on this
front in the last few years, even today many rapes are not reported at all.
There is still this stigma attached to a rape victim. She runs the risk of being ostracized by society. And sometimes even
by her own family.

Then the process! Even if a rape does get reported, it
is often extremely difficult to get a conviction. Here again the rape victim is
often made to appear as the person in the wrong. As if SHE is to blame for the rape. You see, SHE shouldn't have been out that late. And surely, SHE shouldn't have worn those tight-fitting jeans? The rapist is often better connected,
so it is often the victim who has to undergo additional mental torture to “prove”
that she was raped. As if she has not undergone enough already! And mind you,
given the time that cases usually take in India’s courts, justice, if it were
to come at all, could end up being nothing more than farcical.

And then, even if the rapist DOES get convicted, the
penalty? Does it match the enormity of the crime? Many would say no. And after all this, when the victim, inspite of all the scars she's received - physically and mentally - wants to get on with her life, society does not allow her to. Just because she's been raped, it means her life's over? Why?

Anyway, considering all this, there’s no wonder that rapes
occur all over the country every single day with total impunity. There’s a lot –
and I really mean a LOT – that needs to be fixed purely on the operational and
legal side of this issue.

Many suggestions have come up in the last few days. To
be honest, I got a déjà vu feeling seeing many of them. Fast-track courts for
rape cases? Surely this isn’t the first time we’re talking about them?

But I’m still happy that these suggestions are being
made now. And THIS TIME will hopefully be more than just idle talk. For if even
NOW we don’t DO something, I really don’t know what else needs to happen in
this country for us to act. For me – and hopefully I speak for most Indians – “push”
has definitely come to “shove” now.

While there is universal outrage about rape, there are
different opinions about what constitutes the most effective “deterrent” for
rape. Some advocate the death penalty, others a life sentence. Some advocate
bobbitization, some chemical castration.

To be honest, I’m not very sure where I stand on this.
Clearly, there must be a stronger deterrent than we have today. A much stronger
one. But I will leave it to more competent persons to determine what that
should be.

The other important thing that I’m hearing a lot – and
had that déjà vu feeling about – is police reforms. Surely this is a
no-brainer? Where do I start?

In my opinion, by and large, the police in India
operate under very stressful conditions. They are under-staffed, they are not
well trained, they don’t have modern equipment, they work very long hours, they
are under-paid compared to other more cushy professions, they are often
rendered impotent in their jobs by political interference. And then we expect
them to do a great policing job? To take care of the safety of the citizens of
the country?

The answer is yes. We expect them to do this. While we may sympathise with their situation, we still have
every right as citizens to expect our police to do their job. The police is an arm of
our government. And one of the absolutely primary jobs of a government of a
country is to protect its citizens from external and internal threats to their
safety.

I cannot think of a bigger governance failure in our
country than that of breakdown of law and order, at an individual level. Sure,
maybe we don’t have the mass breakdown that we sometimes hear about in our neighbor
country, Pakistan, but I wouldn’t pat ourselves too much on the back for this.
At an individual level, a citizen rarely has the confidence that the police is
there to help him or her. That is the policeman’s job, his raison d’etre. The
common perception (and mind you, even if it’s unfair and untrue, it is still a
perception) is that the police is there for the powerful, for the mafia, not
for the common man or woman.

I’d like to think the police are the way they are (or
are perceived to be), not because they WANT to be that way. But because of all
the issues they face in their job. If so, for me, police reforms cannot happen
sooner in this country. If catching perpetrators of crime is itself such a rare
feat, one can forget about the judicial process that follows.

But for me, while all of this is required, what is
really really REALLY required is social reconditioning.

We’ve been talking about the law and the police, but
what will be the biggest help – most certainly over a period of time – will be
changing the mindset in our society with regard to rape. And women in general.

Again, where do I start? There is SO MUCH wrong in our
mindset that there’s a LOT of work to be done on this front.

For starters, we’ve been carrying around this
sex-inequality mindset with us for centuries. Not just India but the whole
world. Only, some developed countries have a more balanced mindset on this now
(well, relatively speaking) whereas we’ve still got a LONG way to go.

In India, women are still seen very much as “the weak
sex” and men as the “strong sex”. This fundamentally flawed thinking (derived from physiological differences between the two sexes), is to me at the root of many problems. Not just rape, but most forms of VAW stem from this. For example,
domestic violence is often purely a manifestation of physical superiority. When a man is frustrated with life, or does not have an answer to a problem, he hits out at somebody who is physically less likely to hit back at him. And who is that usually? A woman.

Rape also fits in very comfortably into
this narrative. Rape, as many have pointed out, is not so much about sex as
about a statement of power, a statement of physical superiority. As noted film-maker Shekhar
Kapur said on a talk show last week, armies in the past would march into
conquered lands and not just pillage their wealth but also rape their women. That was
their way of saying “we’ve won, we’re stronger than you”.

Even today this is one way that men choose to “teach
women a lesson”.As India is in the process of modernizing itself, as the country is on
its way to economic development, more and more women in the country are beginning to do
fairly well for themselves. They are getting more educated, they are getting
jobs that were going to men in the past. Men used to be fairly secure about their position in society. Not anymore.So what do the men do? Do they try to
become more competitive? Some do. But some others just take an “easier” route.
They take out their frustration on the "cause of their problem" using the one attribute they are still confident about – their physical superiority. They just attack – or rape - the woman. Or any
woman, because their hatred is now not towards just that one woman, but towards
women at large.

Then, we have the moral police. The men who think
they are protecting their “culture”. They have an image of “how a woman should be” somewhere
in their heads. How she should dress, what she should do, and not do. They then
go about enforcing THEIR image in society at large. Welcome, the Rama Sena.
Welcome, the khap panchayats in Haryana. Welcome, many more unorganized groups
(even individuals) who think the woman is “wrong” so she should be “taught a
lesson”.

Then there are the “macho” guys. Yes, they believe
that proof of their being “macho” is how many women they have “scored with”. For
them, rape is just fun. A points game. They would pick up any woman and rape
her – just to brag to their friends about it.

Then there are the perverts. These are the ones who
rape the very girls who trust them. A large number of rapes happen by men known
– and trusted – by the victim. Many of the victims in these cases are minors.

Even as I’m writing this, my heart is breaking. I am
sure there are more categories. I’ve only discussed four so far – the frustrated
man who takes out his frustration with life on a woman, the moral policeman who
thinks “errant women need to be taught a lesson”, the “macho” man who thinks
women exist for his enjoyment alone, the pervert who abuses that most valuable
of human traits – trust.

So where do we start fixing these?

To me, there’s one – and only one place – that we can
start fixing this.

And that’s in childhood.

No male child starts life as a potential rapist. He is
just a child who can become anything.

His environment and his upbringing determine his value
system. They determine how he interacts with other people. Very importantly, they
determine how he sees women.

If all around him, he sees women objectified, there’s
a fair chance he will do the same. You can then safely expect him to pass lewd
remarks at women at bus stops, grab them at every opportunity – and quite
possibly rape them to show off to his friends.

If all around him, he sees men acting holier-than-thou,
talking down women, and dictating to them how they should or should not behave,
there’s a good chance he will become part of a moral police brigade later in
life. After all, "men know best what’s good for society – and therefore what
women’s role is and how they should fulfil it."

I think my point is clear. If we don’t want rapists in
society, we need to start by working on a young boy’s formative years, on his impressionable years. This is the best time to instill in him a sense of respect for all.
Especially women. Teach him that men and women are father-mother, brother-sister, friends, partners. Most importantly, that they are equal. And if he's been endowed with greater physical strength, it is for being put to good use. And for protecting and helping women. For his mother is a woman too - and is the reason for his existence.

I don't think it is very difficult to get this message across. At that age, it shouldn't be.

But EVERYBODY has to work on this. Family, schools,
society, media, government, everybody. The ENTIRE environment needs to
encourage this value system, otherwise there is a chance of him falling
through.

I know this sounds idealistic. Maybe it is, too. But I
strongly believe in preventive, rather than corrective, measures. Looking at myself, I feel I am a product
of a good environment - and that has shaped much of my thinking. I guess I’m lucky. There are millions of other guys
like me out there – I think we turned out alright. With an ok value system, at
least with regard to women. So don’t
tell me it cannot be done. But it needs ALL of us to be part of this process. We need to build our society together. We need to build tomorrow's world together. Otherwise the lament of Sahir Ludhianvi "aurat ne janam diya mardon ko, mardon ne usey bazaar diya", written all of 54 years ago and relevant even today, will be relevant a hundred years from today too.No excuses, none of that "men are made like this only", "it's about testosterone, you know" nonsense. There is NOTHING to be proud about - and NOTHING that can justify - violating another's life.

So while we work on all the “deterrents”, while we
work on judicial reforms, while we work on police reforms, can we please also put our efforts into changing the male mindset? It is a problem created by MEN, after all, so they need to be a big part of the solution.

Because, to me, THIS is the only long-term sustainable
form of society that we should be working towards.

Where men and women live and work together.

Without being threatened by the other’s presence. And actually learning that being together in society, as different sexes, is a lot of fun.

I am somewhat lostFor I'm in search of my own selfI am somewhat subduedFor I'm disillusioned at the momentI used to weave dreams onceWhen I thought I could see a ray of hopeBut now I feel like a gamblerDealt a hand that can only lose

P.S: My occasional forays in the world of poetry sometimes do border on the morose. This is purely because I like to indulge in all moods in my poetry, not just the gung-ho type. The poetry should therefore not be seen as necessarily reflective of my state of mind. :-)

Tuesday, September 04, 2012

Disclaimer: I have NOTHING to
do with Samsung or any of its competitors. I have NOTHING to do with the tech
or professional blogging industry. Am
just a random blogger who has opinions on all sorts of things in this
world and does not usually keep his opinions to himself. You are most welcome
to disagree with my views – and I respect your right to do so. So, with malice towards none...

One of the hot topics doing the rounds on social media in the last few
days is about how two tech bloggers from India were sent by Samsung India to
Berlin to cover the IFA event there. There’s a lot available about this whole
sordid episode on the net – I will not therefore repeat the whole story. You
can catch more about it here .

In short, the two bloggers (one of them preferred to not be named, the
other who has raised a hue and cry is Clinton Jeff (CJ), apparently a
well-known tech blogger) clearly agreed to be sent by Samsung only in the
capacity of “reporters” and not “promoters” for Samsung. Once they’d reached
Berlin however, they were required to undertake various promotional activities.
When they refused, they were told that from that moment on, they were on their
own - Samsung would not arrange for their return flight / hotel accommodation.

Maybe I’m over-simplifying the whole thing – and like I said, more
details are available on the net – but I don’t want to add to the echo by just
repeating what’s already out there. Besides, I know nothing about the mobile
tech industry, nothing about tech blogging, not much about product marketing –
so, while common wisdom would suggest I should just keep my mouth shut, I do
think I know a bit about corporate behavior. And I do think, at a holistic level, this is
more about that than about any specific incident.

So here’s my high-level take on this, after reading a number of
blogposts on the subject (and hundreds of comments from people far more experienced in this
field than I am).

First of all, it is absolutely inexcusable that a company makes a threat
like this to anybody – to just leave the person high and dry, in a foreign
land. Not only is it thoroughly unprofessional, it is JUST NOT ON! At the very
least, if the company was unable to work it out with the bloggers in Berlin,
they could have taken action against them on their return to India. IF they
felt they had a case. That would have been the professional thing to do – I
give you a contract, you breach the contract, I sue you. Instead, they went the
“mafia” route. What is this? Godfather – Part 4?

Secondly, I do think Samsung does not even have a fig-leaf to cover
itself in this matter. For me the absolute clincher is that the bloggers (well,
CJ at least) made it very clear UPFRONT that they would go only as “reporters”
for the event and not as “promoters”. The moment they made that clear, Samsung
should have backed off.

But clearly Samsung, for some reason, WANTED them to go. So they, as is
very common in such situations, trivialised the difference between “reporter”
and “promoter”, effectively ignoring it (and, as anybody with any sense of
integrity will tell you, there is a BIG difference between the two).

Samsung knew all along what it wanted from these bloggers. It was not
the first time they were arranging this marketing programme – they knew exactly
what it involved. And if they didn’t, they should have. And they should have
communicated it in full detail upfront to the bloggers. If, after doing that,
the bloggers chose to still go ahead – and then backed out onsite – Samsung may
have had a case (even then the “mafia” treatment would not be on!). Without
this disclosure, Samsung really did not have much of a case – which may be one
reason why they went with the mafia approach. It could well have worked – when
you are in a foreign land (apparently at somebody’s mercy), you are more easily
malleable to demands from that party.

Unfortunately for Samsung, it did not work. CJ did not just “roll over”
– and from that moment on, it began going wrong for Samsung.

In typical corporate damage-control mode, Samsung will now be desperate
to save some face from this episode. It will become a PR case-study (maybe for
students in college too) – but to me this is more than just a public relations
issue.

This is an integrity issue. It is an issue of ethics.

Had this been a start-up, in its first product launch event, trying to
garner a bunch of guys to help market its products I may have understood a
goof-up like this. Start-ups often do not have systems in place, they don’t have elaborate
dos-and-don’ts or processes laid out, they make mistakes, they learn from them,
they hone their processes.

Samsung is hardly a startup. They are at the bleeding edge of consumer
products and consumer marketing. They must be having huge marketing budgets and
teams, they’ve done lots of product launches, this particular launch in Berlin
is not their first. In fact, they have this “Mobi!er” programme for a while –
so they must be considered veterans at this game.

That is why I absolutely refuse to believe that this was just a one-off,
unfortunate incident due to a “misunderstanding”. Ok, so this one came to light
– I wonder how many have not come to light at all? Either because a deal was
struck, or the concerned blogger caved in, or just didn’t bother to make an issue
of it. I think I’ve read something about a France-related Samsung incident too.

I don’t want to make this about Samsung alone. True, I may be coming down strongly on them here – but this is not to say that other
corporates do not indulge in such practices. Or even that they do. It is all about good and bad practice - and could happen to any company.

While on this, I find some arguments rather absurd. If you question one
company’s dodgy practice, you find comments saying “yes, but X company also
does it. Actually everybody is doing it”. As if that sort of legitimizes that
behavior!

I also came across comments blaming the blogger, saying he should have “expected”
to be promoting Samsung onsite seeing as they were sponsoring his trip. The “no
such thing as a free lunch” argument. I don’t agree with this because he did
make it clear upfront what he expected his role to be. If Samsung was ok with
this, how can the blogger be blamed?

I just think in this very dog-eats-dog world, one can never be too
careful about intentions of the other party one is dealing with. However “big”
or “reputed” that party is.

We sometimes tend to equate company size, image, products and global
presence with integrity. Big companies LOVE that we do this - but we should
know that they are VERY different things! Surely we’ve seen enough examples in
recent times to make us wary of corporations and their integrity?

Also, it is always better to be safe than sorry. Especially in business
dealings. Get everything in black-and-white so that you have a case if somebody
tries to use/abuse you. Sad, but that’s the world we live in – and we need to
protect ourselves.

In this particular instance, I think what CJ could have done better (instead of just saying he wanted to go as "reporter" and not "promoter") is to ask Samsung to give him
in writing what specific activities he'd need to do on their behalf. Like
donning their uniform, attending their briefing session, representing them at
their stall as their spokesperson.

When you nail it down to this detail, you
get a better sense of the whole picture, there is less room for assumptions and surprises, you can make a better call. (I think I read a comment on one of the blogs saying that Samsung
does lay down, in detail, what they expect from “reporters” and “promoters”. Possibly, this was not shared with CJ. Maybe an oversight,
maybe not. It is not unusual that parties keep things vague, they obfuscate matters if it plays to their advantage.)

A final note – SCREAM if you feel you’re being wronged. Corporates HATE
negative publicity – their PR departments will go into overdrive to start
damage-limitation and issue “appropriate messages” to social media. But deep
down they know that the damage has been done already – and that is what we
should make them realize. So that they pre-empt situations arising, they
pre-empt bad practice, they weed out poor employees. Nothing like negative
feedback to galvanise corporates, to keep them on their toes. And thankfully
today we have social media to help us to reach the whole world with our voice.
(One of course is better advised to use this medium only if there is a genuine
case of injustice – otherwise this is a double-edged sword).

It is said that every cloud has a silver lining. That even from
something bad, eventually something good does come out of it. If, from this sordid
episode, there is a better awareness and understanding of how to deal with
corporates (especially if you are just an individual), then I’d say some good
HAS come out of this.

P.S: This piece may appear to be rather one-sided, or
not “balanced” enough. It may look like I’m coming down rather heavily on
Samsung and not enough on the blogger. That is deliberate. If somebody can put
up a credible defence for Samsung in this matter, I’d be happy to reconsider my
position. In the absence of such material, I’m sticking to my above take.

I’ve always believed that in most aspects of life, it is far more important to
try to be FAIR than to be “balanced”. The job of a judge is to pass a FAIR
judgment based on the evidence presented to him. If the evidence is
overwhelmingly in favor of one party, it would be a poor judgment if, in the
interest of “balance”, he patronises the other party. It would be unfair on the
aggrieved party - and a lesson wouldn't be learnt by the offending party. The only balance a judge needs to ensure, in my opinion, is that both parties are given an equal opportunity to state their cases.

So, though I'm not a judge (I'm not even in that profession!), this is the principle I adopt in my thinking and writing. Yes, fairness is a matter of opinion, but then so is balance. So let’s leave
the "balance" to our diets, our lifestyle and to our cricket/sports teams. Let's first try to be fair in what is often an unfair world.

Thursday, July 26, 2012

Having just written two posts about Rajesh
Khanna in the last week, I had decided that that was enough – and my next post
would be about another subject. After all, my interests in life thankfully span
a wide canvas of subjects – and I’m never really at a loss to find something
that I’d like to discuss.

But an e-mail I received yesterday from a friend
has prompted me to write this post today – and once again it features Rajesh
Khanna. This time though it is not so
much about him but more about that other superstar who is often brought up in
discussions about Rajesh. Yes, I’m talking about Amitabh Bachchan – or Big B,
as he is popularly known.

The e-mail points to a write-up, claiming that
Big B is the bigger superstar, that he was the hero of the “lumpen class”
whereas Rajesh was the hero of the “bourgeois class”. That Rajesh fans have
always resented Big B taking over Rajesh Khanna’s place at the top, that his
“bourgeois” fans have denied “the
revolution that was Amitabh Bachchan”.

Though the writer takes pains to say that he
does not intend any disrespect to the memory of Rajesh Khanna (and I’m happy to take this at face value), I
was just saddened by the tone of the
write-up. In the sense that yet again, it was bashing of Rajesh Khanna and his
fans in order to try to prove Big B as the bigger star.

I had to sigh – this is not new to me. I’ve been
hearing such talk since the late 1970s –
and it is STILL going on. This Rajesh
Khanna vs Amitabh Bachchan comparison.

I thought I should put down some of my own
thoughts on this subject, for whatever they are worth.

Let me start by saying that I think whoever came
up with the observation “comparisons are odious” could not have coined a more
sensible 3-word sentence in the English language.

And yet, it seems we just cannot get away from
making comparisons ALL the time. This actor vs that actor, this music composer
vs that music composer, this sportsperson vs that sportsperson. Mohammad Rafi
vs Kishore Kumar is one of the most common comparisons out there.

I always wince at such comparisons. Not because they cannot be made but because they invariably
result in one of the choices being belittled to prop up the other.

Whenever I’ve been dragged into this sort of
discussion, I’ve always taken great pains to emphasise that it is my personal
choice – and that it is not a general statement of one being better than the
other, or that the other is necessarily bad because I didn’t pick him.

For example I may say I prefer watching a Rajesh
Khanna romantic movie to an Amitabh Bachchan action movie. It does NOT mean
Rajesh is better than Amitabh or that Amitabh Bachchan action movies are bad.
It is just that I’d rather see a Rajesh romantic movie. Another person may
prefer an Amitabh action film – and that’s absolutely fine by me.

But there are people – many people – who are
just unable to accept that another person may have a different preference than
their own. They are hell-bent on pushing their choice as THE right one – and
every other choice as the wrong one.

You see that in discussions about religion too.
This attitude has led to possibly every religious war that has ever taken
place. The whole concept of “to each his own” and “live and let live” somehow
seems to have completely passed these guys by.

Back to the Rajesh vs Amitabh discussion.

My own take on this is extremely simple.

Rajesh was THE superstar with the success of
Aradhana. He had 15 hits in a row – there was absolutely no doubting his
position at the top or the fan following he had. ALL classes of society were crazy about him
– not just the “bourgeois”. (If only the “bourgeois” were crazy about
Rajesh, who was then the hero of the “lumpen classes”?)

And then around 1974 or maybe 1975, his magic
began wearing off. For a whole host of
reasons that have been discussed so many times that they don’t warrant
repetition here.

It was also the time that Amitabh Bachchan was
finally beginning to taste success. His Zanjeer and Deewar were both not just runaway
box-office successes, it was his performance in both these movies that most
certainly caught people’s attention.

So, as it turned out, on one hand there was a
Rajesh in descent. On the other hand, there was an Amitabh in ascent. Rajesh continued to deliver flop after flop,
Amitabh continued to deliver hit after hit. Where Rajesh had Maha Chor and
Bundalbaaz, Amitabh had Deewar and Sholay.

To me the biggest evidence of the changing tide
was that Rajesh’s Mehbooba, with then-No. 1 heroine Hema Malini, and with a
wonderful soundtrack by RD Burman – and a film that was promoted heavily –
crashed at the box-office. It confirmed to many what they had already begun to
realize but were hesitant to openly admit – that the Rajesh days at the top
were now clearly over.

At around the same time, Amitabh, already being
talked about as the Rajesh successor following the success of Deewar and
Sholay, further cemented it with the success of Kabhie Kabhie. I clearly
remember Kabhie Kabhie being a HUGE musical hit – and Amitabh pretty much then
being accepted as the new No.1.

I will be honest – I hated it. I hated Kabhie
Kabhie – I hated the title song because it was being played EVERYWHERE – and it
symbolized to me yet another hit for Amitabh, yet another reason why Rajesh would
struggle to get back his No.1 position.

The truth is, as a Rajesh fan at that time, I
was not ready to concede that Rajesh had lost it. I still thought (or rather,
hoped) that he could come back. By the time Aashiq Hoon Baharon Ka came around
– and I saw it – I was convinced that the writing on the wall was indelible.

It is not that I disliked Amitabh. In fact I
liked him in many of his early movies, especially his movies with Jaya Bhaduri
(even those which had flopped). And I really liked him in Zanjeer and Majboor.
I hadn’t seen Deewar or Sholay then (my mind was not ready though I knew many
of the dialogues by heart).

As Amitabh began getting more popular I began
watching more of his films. Even those that didn’t do too well -like Do
Anjaane, Adalat and Alaap.

I
remember liking Amar Akbar Anthony a lot – and he was really good in it. Today
it is considered a blockbuster film, but I vaguely remember it not being a
runaway success from day one. I think it picked up momentum after a while – and
is now considered one of the classics of the 70s.

The Amitabh movie that really sealed it for me though
was Trishul. I liked the movie a lot – and I thought Amitabh (once again in an
“angry young man” role) was just outstanding.

After that I saw Don – and I liked that film too.

So I really did not have any problems anymore with Amitabh as the No.1. Rajesh’s
time had come and gone, these were Amitabh’s times.

So this thing about Rajesh Khanna fans resenting
Big B taking over Rajesh Khanna’s place at the top was, if I use myself as an
example, a passing phase. And I’ve certainly never denied “the revolution that was Amitabh Bachchan”. And I’d like to think I was pretty
representative of the Rajesh fan of the time.

I think it is not an exaggeration to say that
those late-70s/early 80s were very heady days for Amitabh. I’m not looking at box-office numbers here,
so don’t crucify me but, off the top of my head I remember some movies as being
hits from the start – and some only doing moderately early on.

To me it was obvious that though some of Amitabh’s
movies were not blockbusters – at least when they were released (Do Aur Do
Paanch, Ram Balram, Suhaag,The Great Gambler, Barsaat Ki Ek Raat, Yaarana) - and
Shaan was a superflop - he was still the undisputed No.1 and the go-to hero for
a big film-maker. For every movie that did not do very well, he had a Muqaddar
Ka Sikandar, Mr. Natwarlal, Naseeb, Laawaris, Namak Halal and a Satte Pe Satta
to show as successes. He had no
challenger – the next guy (whoever he was) did not even come close.

In fact, I cannot even think of a name who could
have been considered an Amitabh challenger at that time. Dharam – who’d had
successes throughout the 70s - was clearly on his way down by the end of the
decade. The multi-starrer culture of the time meant that it was difficult for one
actor to really put on a dominating or memorable performance. The storylines
also were not the particularly emotional type to be memorable, or require any
great acting skill from the actor.

Maybe it is for this particular reason (the
storyline) that I found it difficult to warm to movies of the time. I was a big
fan of a good storyline – the actors became secondary for me if I found the
storyline kept me interested. Besides, I was getting busy with my studies then
– so I didn’t have time to waste on seeing all sorts of movies.

By 1983, I had stopped seeing movies altogether.
Partly due to my studies, partly because I was losing interest in them. Mind you, I’m not saying they were bad
movies. I’m just saying I didn’t find them interesting enough anymore.

Amitabh continued to act through the 80s – I
think Sharaabi (which I saw many years after its release) was his last big hit
in that period. Otherwise, I believe he acted in several films which even his
ardent fans would consider forgettable.

His more recent history – the 1990s and beyond –
is very well-known and I don’t want to talk about it here. In fact I don’t know
too much about it because I am time-frozen on Amitabh in 1982 (say, Namak
Halal).

What I do remember is the hysteria around his
accident during the making of Coolie. It was HUGE. The accident came as a big
shock to everybody, it got front-page coverage in the daily newspaper , people
from all over the country (and probably overseas too) began praying for his
welfare. It was a great show of solidarity and support for him as he struggled
in hospital during that period. I remember that all too well – as if it were
yesterday.

The reason I am documenting all this is to
illustrate that Amitabh was just as popular – and at times, possibly more
popular – than Rajesh. And I say this
without denying my fondness for Rajesh. And
I do like Amitabh too – it IS possible to like them both.

I want people to realize that it is NOT
necessary to belong to one camp or the other. Yes, we used to have that sort of
thing in school – Rajesh or Amitabh, Vishwanath or Gavaskar, where we felt we had to align behind one of
the options to show our loyalty to that option. When you grow up a bit, you realize
that these are not binary choices – there’s room to accommodate and appreciate
multiple choices.

And it is most certainly NOT necessary to run
one of them down to prop up the other.

To me, they were two distinct periods of
superstardom.

Rajesh Khanna from 1969 to 1974.

And Amitabh Bachchan from 1977 onwards. I would consider the years 1975-76 as transition
years, with Rajesh losing his No.1 position and Amitabh getting to that position, but not yet reaching
superstar status.

Why then the constant clashes between their two
fans?

Why can’t they accept that both of them had
their moments as the darling of the crowds?

Why is it necessary to run down one to prop up
the other?

To me, this only shows disrespect to the persons
involved. The media played on this “rivalry” for a long time – and must have
sold lots of copies in the process. But that’s what the media often does.

The fans need not fall into this trap. They can
give both these superstars their own rightful place in Hindi film history,
without pushing one out to trumpet the other.

There is enough space in the annals of Hindi
film history for both to co-exist peacefully, next to each other.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

My earlier post on Rajesh Khanna, written
soon after his death, was an outpouring of emotion more than anything
else. Much of it had to do with my
memories of the man from my younger days, especially my school days.

School life, especially
primary/secondary school, is usually the time of your life when you look at things
through the most innocent of lenses. Things are often black and white – you don’t
know, or usually care, about the complex aspects of any topic.

That post was intended to remember
Rajesh Khanna as I knew him – inasmuch as one can “know” an actor who he has
never met or had contact with. But Rajesh made a connection with me in my
childhood and the post was MY way of thanking him for all those good memories
of that time. And though there is some reference to the “other” side of Rajesh
(the side we did not see on film), it was not the main focus of that post. My childhood memories are of Rajesh the ACTOR,
not Rajesh the HUMAN BEING.

Today, as I am pushing 50 – and have,
over the years, seen a bit of life – I think I can take a distance from just
Rajesh the ACTOR and talk a bit about Rajesh the HUMAN BEING. He might hate me
for this – for he himself often did not seem to see his life as anything other
than one big acting performance (his last words about “pack up” would seem to
confirm this) but I do want to discuss this anyway. Because I think this is THE
CRUX of the complex character that was Rajesh Khanna.

Much of what I will say here is
based on my take on life – and I tend to think it could apply to anybody, not
just Rajesh Khanna. But then again it is MY take, so I have no illusions about others
necessarily having to agree with me.

Very importantly, everything I say about Rajesh here is NOT being said as a
Rajesh fan. My previous post, yes – this one, no. I am writing this as a
near-50 adult – not a starry-eyed teenager. I was, am – and will always be – a Rajesh
fan, but I think I have the ability to take a reasonable distance from that
relationship and be able to construct an opinion divested from the baggage that
such closeness carries with it.

Equally importantly, I have
absolutely no pretensions about having access to, or being privy to, any aspect
of Rajesh Khanna’s life that is not out there in the public doman. I’ve never
met him – I’ve only seen him as an actor on screen. And read various items
about him in the media over the last 40-odd years. That’s it. My assessment is
based entirely on this limited exposure to the man. Those with more exposure to
him could very well have a very different (and possibly more informed) take on
him. So I am NOT speaking from an “insider”
position, just my humble “averagely informed” opinion.

I’d also like to say that I have
no intentions of causing hurt to anybody through this piece. I’ve come across a
lot of vicious attacks on Rajesh in the
last four decades. Even just a couple of days ago, barely a day after Rajesh
was cremated, I received an e-mail from a friend, linking to an amazingly scurrilous
piece about him, published AFTER his death. I will not comment about the
content but I think it must take a certain type of mindset to be able to write
a piece so scurrilous, so soon after a man’s death. It really takes all types…

Maybe, in a sense, that article is
part of the reason I am writing this. I don’t know what it was trying to
achieve – but it does look like those who were baying for Rajesh’s blood during
his lifetime, have no intention of leaving him alone in peace even now. After
all, there’s this upsurge of sympathy and love for Rajesh Khanna - and there’s every chance future generations
may not remember all the bad things that Rajesh did, right? And how can we
allow that to happen? We’ve spent a lifetime telling the world “the truth” – we’re
not going to let a lifetime’s work be undone by a minor detail like the man
dying. The man may be gone but we must soldier on.

I cannot help but cast my mind to those lines
from that famous “Friends, Romans,
Countrymen” speech by Mark Antony in
Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar:

The
evil that men do lives after them

The
good is oft interred with their bones

The “evil” that Rajesh did, does
seem to have a much bigger chance of living on, than the good he must have
done.

But did Rajesh Khanna do any good?
I’m not talking about Rajesh Khanna, the ACTOR here – I am talking about Rajesh
Khanna, the HUMAN BEING.

If he did, there’s hardly any mention
of it anywhere. It is all either about his acting (his films, his songs) or
about all the bad things he’s supposed to have done. At this rate the only
thing future generations will remember of him will be these two sides of his
life. One flattering, the other most decidedly not.

I’d like somebody to stand up and
talk about anything, ANYTHING good that he did as a person. The only positive
comment I can remember now is something I read about Zeenat Aman saying that
when they (the crew) returned from an overseas shooting (presumably for Aashiq
Hoon Baharon Ka), there was some sort of collection drive going on in Bombay for a good cause. Apparently Rajesh Khanna donated a huge
amount – Zeenat did not say how much but she said it was “very generous”.

So are there any more stories like
this out there? Because if there are, it would be nice to get them out there.
So as get a more balanced picture about Rajesh Khanna, the person. I’m feeling like Arnab Goswami here (“the
nation needs to know”) but indeed, there is usually more than one side to a
story or a person. And for the last almost four decades, there’s only side that
has been put out there about Rajesh, the person.

When I wrote my earlier piece, I tweeted it out to a
few persons of a generation earlier than, or the same as, mine. If only hoping to
get a perspective that would enrich my own.

Now they are all busy people and
may not even have read it, let alone have had the time or interest to respond to it.
However, I was very happy and gratified to receive a response from the ever-perspicacious
Madhu Trehan, somebody I have always admired and respected from the early days
of India Today magazine (I used to “devour” it in the 1970s and the early 80s). Madhu now has a
website www.newslaundry.com which I visit regularly – she gives me a reason to have
hope that the terms “values” and “current Indian media” can still be used in the same
sentence.

In three tweets, Madhu gave me her take on Rajesh Khanna – and,
though they may sound harsh, they are loaded with wisdom – and probably a fair
summation of Rajesh Khanna’s biggest failing.

I quote them here (I trust she won’t
mind):

@Raja_SwAll I can
say, judging a man by his films and what he was as a human being are different
parameters

@Raja_SwI saw a man
who took his success too seriously & his failures too seriously-thereby his
place on earth too seriously

@Raja_SwA person who
misses his Lightness of Being, has missed the point of existence

Hmm…

That was an angle that I’d NEVER
thought of but it tied in very nicely with the angle that I HAD thought of.

And that was that Rajesh Khanna’s
biggest failing was that he lived in a bubble.

I cannot help feeling that it is
very ironic that one of Rajesh Khanna’s most famous dialogues is one that goes “ye duniya ek rang manch hai aur hum sab rang
manch ki kathputhliyaan”.

I firmly believe Rajesh not just
delivered this line of dialogue, he got caught up in it – and he lived the rest
of his life, trapped by the illusion and delusion of the world that it creates.

The average Joe goes through life
with a whole range of experiences shaping his thinking, his evolution and his
interactions with society. The more exposed he is to real-life happenings, the
hustle-bustle of daily life, the more he comes to terms with the world.

However, Rajesh’s life was
anything but like the average Joe’s life.

For starters, he was just 26 when
Aradhana released and he was catapulted to an overnight sensation status. The
feeling must have been unbelievably heady – some thing that I am unable to even
relate to, because I’ve never had (and am never likely to have) the experience
of the frenzied adulation of millions and millions of people, falling all over
you, wanting to touch you, wanting to marry you, wanting to get one glimpse of
you. It is one thing to aspire for fame
and a celebrity status – it is totally another to be able to handle it if and
when it does come to you.

Then the sycophants. Rajesh was
made to feel like God. Not just by his fans but by those around him. They
pampered him, they attended to his every whim and fancy, they ensured the
thickening of the walls of the bubble that he got into – and they did such a
good job of it that he stayed trapped within.
Apparently Rajesh did not take kindly to criticism – and these so-called
well-wishers weren’t going to say or do anything that could get them in his bad
books and ruin their own parasitic progress.

Then the habits. Leading from the
above, it isn’t strange at all that Rajesh’s habits began getting “aiyaash” (wastrel-like). “The world can wait, after all I am Rajesh
Khanna. A star, not a clerk”. The drinking, the drama, the sense of being God…

Then the fall. I was looking for a
term that describes it better than “precipitous” but I cannot find one, so I’ll
settle for this. One after another, his films began failing – largely due to
the above. With such sycophants around you who don’t dare tell you what you’re
doing wrong, with such habits that are bound to reflect on your performances,
it should have been seen coming from a mile. The external environment was one thing, but the self-destruction that Rajesh inflicted on himself was the far bigger reason for his fall, in my opinion.

But SO lost was he in that bubble
that he got into denial – he kept
telling himself that his films were doing well, that he was still the number one.

And that to me was always his key
problem. He was in that bubble, he was in denial for way too long. In order for
a person to accept reality, he has to first come out of denial and face
reality. Acceptance comes only thereafter. But if somebody does not even come
out of denial, there’s no hope, there’s only delusion.

I know I’m saying seemingly harsh things here – and it is indeed
“chhota moonh, badi baat”. In fact “bahut
hi chhota moonh, badi baat”, given our relative statures and achievements in
life. But I don’t think I am that far off from the truth.

And sometimes I wish I’d been
there with Rajesh during those heady days of his. I’d have told him to his face
– and borne the brunt of his response, abuse and all. And I’d have told him
again. And again.

Rajesh may have been getting delusional –but I don't think he was a stupid
man. I'd have persisted - and I’d not have let those
sycophants and leeches get within a mile of him.

And, even if a fall had come
eventually (the old order changeth, and all that), he would have been man
enough to take it into his stride. After all, failure and success are part of
life. I might even have tried some poetry and quotes with him, seeing his
penchant for drama and the like. Kipling’s “Success and failure are the same
imposter” maybe.

Anyway, this is all wishful
thinking. And it was not to be. Maybe he was MEANT to be that poster-boy for
posterity - for how NOT to let success get to your head, how NOT to burn your
bridges, how NOT to trust yes-men around you. Maybe he was meant to be that
lesson for future generations.

Anyway this was MY angle. If you
combine this with Madhu’s angle – that he seemed to take everything too
seriously – his successes, his failures – and therefore his place on earth,
then you get a much stronger sense of the man. You get a sense of – and an
explanation for – his insecurities, his drinking, his moods.

So this is the “Rajesh Khanna, the
person” image that I have.

It is NOT a negative image, mind
you. It is a VERY HUMAN image. It could happen to anybody.

Yes, if he hadn’t taken himself
and his successes/failures SO seriously, he might have been able to have more
equanimity in life and face reality more easily. And if he hadn’t let that
success get to his head, he might have had a much happier and more social life,
once his heyday would be behind him (as it eventually would be anyway).

But these are all ifs and buts.
Life isn’t scripted this way. The more I
think about it, the more I feel Rajesh’s life was a drama in itself – worthy of
an Oscar-winning script. I can’t help feeling he would love for that to happen –
that somebody makes a film on him. Because for him, his reel-life and his real
life were one and the same.

Well, maybe one day somebody WILL
make a film on him.

I just hope that that person is
kind towards him. Truthful – and kind. Tell the dirty picture if you like – but
tell it from the point of view also of somebody who was only human. Who had a
lot of charm and charisma – but, for all that, was still only human.

That is all I ask for him. Let
posterity not know him only as a superstar. Let posterity also know about the
mistakes he made. It is a lesson for one and all.

But, at the same time, let
posterity also not sit and judge him on the narrow canvas of his reel life and
his real-life actions. Let it also seek to understand the motivations and the
tribulations of the very vulnerable mind trapped inside the body of a superstar.

Friday, July 20, 2012

When I logged into
Facebook on the morning of Wednesday, the 18th of July, I saw a link to “vaada tera vaada” from one of my
friends, saying "RIP, Rajesh Khanna".

I immediately logged
onto Twitter – it is my source for latest news (and links to news) around the
world. And yes, #RIP Rajesh Khanna was trending as the top item on Twitter for
India.

Now I’ve seen hoax RIP
hashtags on Twitter before – and there was just this very slight hope within me
that this was a hoax – but I knew, deep within myself and with an increasingly
sinking feeling, that this was it. This was the end.

I took a deep breath
and slowly began reading the tweets and the attached links. They were pouring
in like a tsunami wave – Twitter is
known as THE medium for “outrage”, but
that does it great injustice. Outrage is just a show of emotion – and Twitter
does emotion brilliantly in 140 characters.

All this while, my heart was
sinking. Like most people, I did know that Rajesh was in pretty bad shape. So
in a sense, it was not entirely a surprise or a shock. But somewhere within me,
there was still the hope that he would get better, that he would be
around for some more years. After all, he was just 69 – and that’s young, by
today’s standards.

But it was not to be.
The man who loved to die in his films because his audience seemed to like his films to end that way, decided it was time for real life to imitate reel life just
this one last time.

Memories of Rajesh
movies, memories of Rajesh songs began flooding my mind. I immediately went to youtube to watch some
of his songs. Not his most famous songs, but some songs that I personally like
watching again and again.

Where Rajesh stands out, in my opinion.

I started with “rona
kabhi nahin rona” from Apna Desh. No glamour here, no heroine, no
silk kurta – just a chacha singing to his brother’s kids. I remember singing
this song a lot to my niece way back in the early 80s when she was about three.

I then moved on to “yahan
wahan saare, jahaan pe tera raaj hai” from Aan Milo Sajna. This song took me
right back to my childhood. This is a Rajesh song close to my heart – again it
is “pure” Rajesh, if you know what I mean. I even tweeted this, saying “tere hi
to sar pe mohabbat ka taj hai”.

And so I went on. I
began posting songs on Facebook – only to a select group. (A lot of my friends
are non-Indian and presumably do not know who Rajesh Khanna is. I did not want to spam
them).

Then one of my
childhood favorites – I must have sung this song (badly) at least a million
times. “Kahin door jab din dhal jaaye” (Anand).

And “ye shaam mastaani”
from Kati Patang.

And “ye kya hua, kaise
hua” from Amar Prem.

And the fun-filled “mujh
se bhala ye kaajal tera” from The Train. - Rajesh with Nanda.

And another of my
favorites, “o mere dil ke chain” from Mere Jeevan Saathi. Another one of those "million times, badly-sung" songs by me.

I did not want to drive my friends crazy – I stopped
with just these songs, I think. I did listen to many more though – “gusssa itna
haseen hai to pyar kaisa hoga” (Maryada), “nainon mein nindiya hai” (Joroo Ka
Ghulam)…

In what was still an indescribably incredibly inconsolably despondent mood, I then updated my Facebook status to:

(Who will understand my mood today
The weight that bears upon my heart
For you’ve taken with you on your journey
A piece that used to once be my heart)

Yes, I know it is rubbish poetry. But I was in no frame of mind to construct anything remotely comprehensible at that time.

The thing is, the news of Rajesh Khanna's death took me right back to my childhood. I am talking of the late 60s/early
70s. I was only a young boy then but I vividly remember watching his films
then. I vividly remember many of the songs from his films even if I did not quite understand then the storyline.

For me, Rajesh Khanna
was the first star I “knew”. I’d heard of Dilip Kumar, Raj Kapoor and Dev Anand –
and also Shammi Kapoor. I’d seen their movies as well. But their time at their
peak was “before” my time (in the case
of Shammi, “just before” my time).

Rajesh, on the other
hand, peaked just at the time that I began watching, and becoming aware, of
movies. So I could “feel” his popularity in a way that I could not feel the
popularity of the big names before him.

And what popularity!
By now a lot of people have talked about how he was “the first superstar”, “THE
phenomenon”. You hear lines (sometimes
sounding patronizing) saying “only people who lived during that period will
quite understand what he was”.

Even if one allows for
a bit of misty-eyed exaggeration, I think it is fair to say that it is not much more than a bit. I will speak only from my own experience. Yes, I was very young then,
so my judgment may be questionable, but there was enough evidence all around me to suggest that there was Rajesh Khanna – and there was everybody else.

The first time I remember
hearing his name was when one of my sister’s friends was chatting with my
sister. She had just seen Baharon Ke Sapne and told my sister “The movie is ok. I actually didn’t
like it very much. But oh, Rajesh Khanna….”.

I suspect there were
many, many more who went “Oh, Rajesh Khanna…” in the years to come.

I distinctly remember Aradhana’s
success. I got to see it much after it was

released – but I remember the impact
it had everywhere around me. There was hardly a day you did not hear an Aradhana song. Either on the radio, or
somebody singing or humming it. That is how it seemed to me at least. “Mere sapnon ki
rani” and “roop tera mastana” practically competed with each other for which
was the more popular song of the time – any other song would have come a VERY distant third.

The measure of Aradhana’s popularity can best be gauged by the
fact that my paternal grandmother, who did not know a word of Hindi, and certainly knew no
other Hindi songs, had heard the songs of Aradhana. We didn't have a tape recorder then, so if at all we heard anything, it was on radio. Various songs would be playing - but the moment an Aradhana song played - her eyes would light up and she'd say “Aradhana!” (Well, considering it probably played every single day, it might not have been such a difficult task to recognise the songs, I suppose).

In 1975, during our summer holidays, we had gone for a family event deep in rural South India - in Thanjavur district, often considered then the bastion of anti-Hindi sentiment. There I got
to spend some time with my cousins. They spoke Tamil and English – but not a word
of Hindi. Anyway, they started playing Antakshari – and as one would expect,Tamil songs were being tossed around with
great gusto. With my count of known Tamil songs then being a grand nil, I must confess I felt totally out of place.

One of my cousins,
seeing my lost look, stopped and said “Hindi?” I said “Yes”. “OK” he said. And immediately started
with “mere sapnon ki rani…”. The others joined in. Ok, it was just the first
couple of lines, the words were quite messed up, the accent even more so - but
it felt just SO good. And then there was
the inevitable follow-up with “roop tera”.

To date, I consider these as two of
the most popular songs of Hindi cinema that I’ve known in my life - not counting songs from before my time.

Aradhana was THAT
popular. Rajesh Khanna became an overnight star. Sharmila – already a popular
heroine – went right to the top. I remember Madhuri magazine, having a
discussion about who the No.1 heroine was – they had photos of three heroines (the ones in contention) –
Asha Parekh, Waheeda Rehman and Sharmila Tagore.

When, in the late 90s,
Kaho Na Pyar Hai – with its very popular numbers - became a super-duper hit,
catapulting Hrithik Roshan to overnight fame, it reminded me of Aradhana – and Rajesh Khanna
– all those years ago. Hrithik did not quite manage to do a Rajesh follow-up
act though. He became ONE of the stars, whereas Rajesh left all others behind
to emerge as the one and only superstar.

Like I’ve said, in
those years, there was Rajesh – and there was everybody else. It is not that
others were not delivering hits. Dharmendra and Shashi Kapoor, for example, also
did well in that period. But the Rajesh tsunami was such that everybody seemed
to have eyes for him - and him only.

There is this general impression that it was the female constituency, particularly young girls, that was crazy about Rajesh Khanna. True, but that's not the entire story. People of ALL generations, all age groups, male-female, were pretty crazy about him at that time.

There were a whole lot
of newcomers in that period. I remember Vinod Mehra, Rakesh Roshan, Parikshat
Sahni (then called Ajay Sahni), even Amitabh Bachchan, Shatrughan Sinha and
Vinod Khanna (both starting off in villain roles), Randhir Kapoor, Anil Dhawan,
Navin Nischol, Vijay Arora, Kabir Bedi, Rakesh Pandey, Romesh Sharma, Vikram…I’m sure there
were others too that I have not named here. Some of these definitely tried to
copy Rajesh Khanna. Rakesh Roshan, for example. But they could not QUITE pull
it off.

That was the time when people would blindly
go to watch a movie just because it was a Rajesh movie. They were guaranteed
that smile, that look, that nod of the head – and some glorious songs. Whether the
heroine was Asha Parekh or Sharmila Tagore or Mumtaz or Tanuja or Hema Malini
or anybody else, it did not matter. Even if
the film did not have a heroine opposite him, it did not matter. All that
mattered was that it had Rajesh Khanna.

He did the odd cameo
too. Not many talk about it – but I thought he did a lovely cameo as the flower
vendor in the tear-jerker Anuraag.

I saw almost all
his movies from that early period, in those early years of the 70s. I will not name the movies here, it is almost the entire list of that time. I knew most of the songs from his movies by heart. You just heard them so many times that you could not help it.

I cannot say with absolute certainty what my very first Rajesh movie was. I think it was Sacha Jhootha, though it could just as well have been Do Raaste. I remember seeing these movies very early on, as also Maryada.

True, in terms of superstardom, his reign at the top was all-too-brief.

And true, towards the
end of his golden period, his mannerisms took over and watching him became difficult. His hamming, together with a questionable selection of movies, resulted
in his loyal fan-base getting disenchanted and beginning to feel let down. (I
know, I was one of them).

And yes, that was
exactly the time when Amitabh Bachchan’s star was rising with some excellent
performances in movies like Zanjeer and Deewar. The times were changing - the mood in the country was becoming increasingly cynical and anti-establishment. Romance was taking a backseat, anger was in the front row. There were protests, bandhs, strikes all over the place - I remember that even as a young boy.

Movies are usually a reflection of the times and the society in which, and for which, they are made. More and more people began identifying more easily with the "angry young man" image of Amitabh than the soft, romantic image of Rajesh (which was anyway beginning to get seriously dented with his exaggerated mannerisms). But there is no doubt that, in addition to self-created reasons for his self-destruction, there was the external environment too that was beginning to become alien to Rajesh's style.

Oh, how I hated the fact that Amitabh was taking over Rajesh's place. I had nothing against Amitabh - in fact I grudgingly liked him, especially in his movies with Jaya Bhaduri. And I loved Majboor, one of his most under-rated performances, in my opinion and still one of my Amitabh favorites.

But nobody, NOBODY, took Rajesh's place. He was going through a bad phase, that was all. That's how I convinced myself - though I secretly knew that the magic was wearing off. And well, if everybody in the country was angry about something or the other at that time, I was angry at the movies Rajesh was doing, I was angry at his hamming. But I was still a Rajesh loyalist and I wasn't willing as yet to allow another person to sit on that throne.

I think a lot of Rajesh fans must have switched loyalties and become Amitabh fans at that time. At that age, in school at least, you tended to be identified either with Rajesh or with Amitabh. To be fair to those who switched, it was really becoming very difficult to continue to defend Rajesh. So I wouldn't call them fair-weather fans.

I remember one such ex-Rajesh fan even challenging me "Tell me, can Rajesh act like Amitabh in Deewar?" I struggled with my defence - and could only manage "No, but I don't WANT Rajesh to act like Amitabh. I just want Rajesh to be Rajesh. Like he used to be".

Oh, those mid- and late-70s were difficult times for a Rajesh fan.

And yes, Rajesh’s lack
of professionalism, his poor public relations, his whims, his lack of
maintenance – all of these, individually seriously problematic but collectively conclusively disastrous, ensured that his career,
once it tipped over, went into free fall.

When you read about some of those
stories today, they sound outrageous but one needs to bear in mind that those
were different times. The film industry has changed a lot over the years. Today actors are far more professional, they are extremely conscious about not just their appearance but their image, they are often very boringly politically correct, they are very media-savvy. I think Rajesh was on such a cloud that he did not pay much attention to these non-acting attributes required for an actor's sustained success in the industry.

At that age, I read about all this only in magazines - mainly Filmfare, Star and Style and Stardust. Film magazines were not subscribed to (or encouraged) in our household but we would always get hold of them from friends. So there was plenty of film information (and gossip) available to us.

Even at that age, I was very sceptical of what I read in these magazines. So to me, what I saw on screen was what I made of an actor or a situation. In any case, these backstage problems (of unprofessional behaviour) were something that did not matter to me. The hamming yes, the backstage problems, no. They were all none of my business
anyway.

I do remember reading a lot of anti-Rajesh
Khanna writing in the late 70s. It was as if everybody had been waiting for him to fall. As if everybody was out to get him,
waiting for that chance to get that dagger in, and to twist it.

That his personal life
was also becoming a mess, did not help one bit. At that time, it felt like any news about
Rajesh was only bad news – nobody seemed to have a good word to say about
him. And the witch-hunt seemed to go on, for ever and ever.

So if we are to keep score, I am pretty much
convinced that he paid the price for his failings in far greater measure than
he deserved. No wonder then that he chose
to lead a somewhat secluded life in his later years.

I don’t think Rajesh ever
totally got over the shock of his sudden fall from grace. When you are at THAT
height – and the fall is SO precipitous, it is difficult to keep your senses
around you. Your sycophants leave you, your so-called friends leave you – life suddenly
becomes very lonely.

What Rajesh critics
often fail to mention is that he did realize his mistakes later. I clearly
remember seeing an interview where he admits his mistakes. He does not blame
anybody else for them. Surely that
counts for something?

I stopped seeing
Rajesh Khanna movies after a while. They became painful to watch – if only
because I knew what he had once been. Maybe there was the odd good movie at
that time – I just did not have the heart to watch it. I call that the “Janta
Hawaldar” period – I remember this being one of the movies I expressly skipped at that time.

I do remember watching
Thodisi Bewafai and Avtaar though. Both
of them were telecast on Doordarshan (as the Sunday evening movie) - and I’d heard
they were good. So, rather hesitatingly, I decided to watch them – and am glad I did. I quite liked
them.

In the last couple of
years, I’ve caught up with some of the Rajesh movies I’d avoided in my Rajesh
blackout phase. Movies like Rajput and Kudrat. I thought he was OK in both of
them.

But, on the whole, my
memories of Rajesh will be of the Rajesh of my childhood.

With his death, he has
taken a part of my childhood with him. But I certainly bear him no grudge – for
he gave me so much more in my childhood, so many wonderful moments to cherish
and enjoy, that I will remain ever-grateful to him for this.

As I sign off (still emotional), I cannot help thinking that a tribute to Rajesh without some of his songs would be oh-so-incomplete.

So I will leave you with some of his songs that I feel he could be singing to his various constituencies.

For his critics (whose numbers ran into millions), I have "mere naseeb mein aye dost, tera pyar nahin" (dear friend, it was not in my destiny to get your love). Anand Bakshi's lyrics in this song are just mind-blowing.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPVvXlnV3Vg

For the youth (and with his message to take care of the elderly thrown in), I think he'd have liked to exhort them to enjoy their youth and make the most of it with "yahan wahaan saare jahaan mein tera raj hai". Anand Bakshi again.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVibx0Y9Thc

For the female constituency (and one need have no fear about that number not running into many millions), I can imagine him singing one of my favorite romantic numbers - with that nod of the head of course. The song, with a gorgeous Leena Chandavarkar, with beautiful lyrics (Anand Bakshi again!) and Rafi saab's voice. Oh, how I love the fact that this is Rafi saab's voice.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I1cs6m8hcc

Thank you SO MUCH for everything, Rajesh Khanna. I guess we were just fortunate to have you with us for as long as we did. You will always live on in our hearts. Rest In Peace. And do enjoy your time up there with Kishore and RD.

As for me, well, I can only say chhoti chhoti baaton ki hai yaadein badin.